Sorry, No ID, No Ballot

Republican governors and legislatures from around the country are preparing their strategy to win the 2012 elections by disenfranchising voters without any form of government issued identification. In a systematic push, the need for voter ID laws has been raised claiming that voter fraud is running wild and a serious threat to democracy. Even though the Justice Department has found little evidence to support such claims, the Republicans insist. What are they really getting at? Who are they targeting? By requiring voters to present a photo ID at the polling station, they hope that minorities and the poor will be turned away.

It is not uncommon for people of the poorest socio-economic demographics to not have a valid photo ID, whether it is a driver's license or a state ID. A Brennan Center for Justice study issued in 2006 finds that 11% of American's would not be eligible to vote under these new voter ID laws if passed. Of that 11%, minorities and the poor are disproportionately represented. While not exclusively, the primary reason is the financial burden of paying the fee's required to receive an ID. It is not a coincidence that these groups also tend to vote for Democrats. Under the rules of voter ID laws, Republicans are hoping to silence the voice of minorities and the poor. It's a sleazy and backhanded method to gain the edge in an election...not to mention unconstitutional.

Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) and others recently petitioned the Department of Justice to inquire about the legality of these laws. These Democratic senators are defending the rights of millions of Americans. We cannot allow Republicans to cast a shadow of any form on our right to vote. While addressing voter fraud is a legitimate concern, it is unacceptable to do so in a way that places an extreme burden on those of us who are least capable of carrying it. Those disenfranchised by these laws are otherwise eligible to vote, so let's make sure they stay that way!

Boston Globe Endorses D'Alessandro

The Boston Globe recently celebrated Labor Day by announcing its endorsement of pro-labor candidate Mac D’Alessandro in the race for Massachusetts’s 9^th congressional district against incumbent Representative Stephen Lynch.

Citing concerns that Lynch’s insistence to go his own way often puts him at odds with Democratic Party leadership, the Globe portrays D’Alessandro as a candidate more likely to foster unity and cooperation for the sake of Massachusetts voters. Despite Lynch’s nine years of service, the Globe argues, the only way to repair shattered party relations may be by electing a fresh face.

The Globe writes of Lynch, “When others saw opportunity for historic reforms, he offered skepticism. When others stepped forward to shape legislation, he held back. D’Alessandro would be quite different: More cautious about military interventions, including Afghanistan; more willing to do the necessary work of reforming the economy, even when it involves unpopular fixes like bailing out the banking and housing industries; more eager to be a leader both in extending health coverage and in bringing research dollars to Massachusetts.”

D’Alessandro, best known for his service as New England Political Director for the Service Employees’ International Union, has criticized Lynch in the past for corporate ties. If elected, he promises to protect the rights of working families against abuse from special interests.